Connect with us

Published

2 years ago

on

Elon Musk Workers

I think Elon Musk deserved his $55 billion Tesla CEO compensation plan, and I voted for him to get it, but it doesn’t mean he should get it.

I would probably vote for it again. Hear me out.

There’s a lot of confusion among the reactions to the judge’s decision to rescind Elon’s $55 billion CEO compensation plan from Tesla.

The main arguments I hear from Tesla shareholders are that “I voted for the plan”, “the plan was successful for Elon, Tesla, and shareholders”, and “I don’t feel like I was misled by Tesla or Elon about this compensation plan”.

These arguments can appear valid, and Musk is currently amplifying them on X right now as he goes full propaganda mode to redirect the narrative amid the judge’s decision. He is pushing the narrative that the judge is taking away the shareholders’ right to decide for themselves, but it’s not as simple as that. Hear me out.

I can see how this argument is attractive; I sympathize. I voted for the plan myself back in 2018. And I think there might be an outcome to this that could make most people happy. So before you dismiss me as an Elon hater, please hear me out.

It’s a complicated situation, and I think that most people who are simply jumping to Elon’s defense have simply not read the judge’s decision. I know it’s long, but if you have any interest in this, and especially if you want to comment on this situation, I suggest you read it first. It includes a full chronology of the “negotiation” of the plan with an in-depth background based on testimonies and depositions from everyone involved. It’s undoubtedly a great look at how the biggest CEO compensation plan of all time came to be, and while I see Elon coming down hard on the judge or Delaware, Tesla’s state of incorporation and where the lawsuit was filed, I don’t see him disputing the facts in it.

To summarize, it’s not as simple as answering the questions: “is the package fair or unfair?” or even “did Elon deserve the package?”. He very well might have. Tesla achieved incredible things under Elon’s leadership. I’m the first to admit it, and despite all the hate McCormick is getting from Elon fans today, she also admits it in the decision. The problems that led to this litigation are more about governance, and I know this is a controversial issue at Tesla. There’s no hiding it. Elon didn’t want Tesla to be a public company. He said it several times and he is saying it again now. He would prefer it to be private, but it’s not. For better or worse, it’s a public company and it has to be governed as such.

Elon saved Tesla from death several times, but Tesla shareholders also saved Tesla. Tesla would have been dead without its strong base of shareholders, and they are due proper governance at the company. Proper governance is the basis of a modern public company, and Tesla has always played fast and loose with the relationships between its shareholders, boards of directors, and executives. Now, it’s biting them in the ass.

How does it relate to this lawsuit? Yes, Tesla shareholders voted 80% for this $55 billion comp package. 20% of shareholders voted against it. Many people, including Elon, want to stop the issue there. I know it’s tempting, but it’s missing the point of this lawsuit and the judge’s decision completely.

Tesla shareholders made that decision based on the recommendation of “the Independent Members of Tesla’s Board of Directors” in this proxy statement.

The proxy accurately explained how the compensation package worked, but make no mistake, Tesla’s board also was trying to sell the plan to shareholders in that proxy statement. They said things like:

“In crafting this award, we were mindful of Elon’s existing stock ownership levels and the strong belief that the best outcome for our stockholders is for Elon to continue leading the company over the long-term. We created the award after more than six months of careful analysis with a leading independent compensation consultant as well as discussions with Elon, who along with Kimbal otherwise recused themselves from the Board process.”

At the core of the case, the judge had to decide whether or not those shareholders had all the correct information about this plan. If they hadn’t, they would have been misled and would have potentially voted differently.

Now, you might be Elon’s biggest fan right now and might be thinking: “I don’t care if the information wasn’t perfectly accurate, I don’t feel like I was misled, and I would have voted for it anyway.”

That’s fine. I don’t mind that. I don’t wan’t to speak for her, but Judge McCormick probably doesn’t care either. The thing is that maybe other shareholders would have felt differently about it, and you don’t speak for them. It could have changed their vote. It’s as simple as that. You cannot mislead or lie to your investors in a public company. It’s as simple as that.

Now, what was misleading? At the core of it, the judge deemed the board members not to be independent. In short, that would make the entire proxy statement misleading as it is presented as coming from the independent members of the board. After testimonies and depositions from everyone involved, the judge described the problematic relationships like this:

“The process leading to the approval of Musk’s compensation plan was deeply flawed. Musk had extensive ties with the persons tasked with negotiating on Tesla’s behalf. He had a 15-year relationship with the compensation committee chair, Ira Ehrenpreis. The other compensation committee member placed on the working group, Antonio Gracias, had business relationships with Musk dating back over 20 years, as well as the sort of personal relationship that had him vacationing with Musk’s family on a regular basis. The working group included management members who were beholden to Musk, such as General Counsel Todd Maron who was Musk’s former divorce attorney and whose admiration for Musk moved him to tears during his deposition. In fact, Maron was a primary gobetween Musk and the committee, and it is unclear on whose side Maron viewed himself. Yet many of the documents cited by the defendants as proof of a fair process were drafted by Maron.”

Again, for more details, I strongly suggest you read the entire decision. It includes a full chronology of the “negotiations”. It clearly shows that the board operated as a proxy for Elon. The only correct governance guideline they followed was for Elon and his brother to recuse from the board meetings when discussing the compensation package, but they completely overlooked the fact that the chair of the compensation committee was a close friend of both Elon and Kimbal, same for Gracias, who was also on the committee, and they all had personal financial dealings together outside of Tesla.

They clearly were not independent. The only person on the compensation committee who can be considered independent was Denholm, but she was also getting a nice compensation package that made her a very rich woman. So she played ball. Now she is Tesla’s chairwoman and just signed a new deal to sell up to $50 million in shares.

Now, in any decent public company, these conflicts should have never existed in the first place, but at the very least, it should have been communicated to shareholders. They failed to do that. Again, I know that maybe none of that changes anything for you. Maybe you would have voted the same way knowing that Elon and his representative were instrumental in crafting the whole comp plan and he was “negotiating” not with “independent board members” but with friends that he had long-time business dealings with even outside of Tesla.

Personally, I knew most of that, and I voted for it. I didn’t know the depth in which Elon and his lawyer Todd Maron were involved in the process, but I knew that Tesla’s board was far from independent. But regardless, I have to be aware that maybe some of that information would have affected other shareholders, and they would have voted differently.

Based on that, I have to agree with the judge. The vote was not valid because the proxy presenting it to the shareholder wasn’t accurate. It was tainted by Tesla’s governance issues.

What now? Maybe Elon could still get his package? The guy already wasted most of it on a way overpriced Twitter. It would be a shame for him to have to give it back.

Jokes aside, now that the information is out there, I would be fine with Tesla making sure that this information gets distributed to the shareholders and have them vote on it again. I’d be curious to see the results. It might even pass again. I wouldn’t be shocked. I would probably even for it again myself.

I think that Elon did great things for Tesla in the next few years following the adoption of that plan. He gave a lot of time, sweat, and tears to successfully lead Tesla to develop, produce, and distribute the first electric car to become the best-selling vehicle in the world. It undoubtedly changed the auto industry for the better, forever. Is it worth $55 billion? Maybe. Probably. It’s hard to say. But I’m not against it. It’s not like shareholders didn’t get rich along with him – albeit to a much smaller degree.

I don’t think there’s a lot of negative to Elon getting the package, but it needs to be properly presented to shareholders in accordance with the rules of a public company, and it wasn’t. That’s it. But it’s important.

Being successful and getting yourself and your shareholders rich doesn’t make you above the law.

Now, if we talk about Elon getting a new CEO compensation plan at Tesla for his future work at the company. I think that’s different. I would approach that very carefully, as he has proven in the last few years to have a different relationship with Tesla. He is now leading 6 different companies. It’s insane. No matter how you look at this, Tesla has a part-time CEO.

The bigger thing to come out of this situation is that Tesla has a governance problem. It needs an independent board that believes in Tesla’s mission but who are not an old friend or business partner of Elon. We need people who can rein him in when needed.

Like Leo KoGuan, Tesla’s third largest shareholder, said, Elon is running Tesla like a family business. While that might be appealing to some, you simply cannot do that in a public company. Elon’s own reaction to the judgment makes it clear:

There are problems with comments like that because Tesla is a public company whether he likes it or not. Elon’s reality distortion field is powerful but not enough to make that go away.

If Elon couldn’t take Tesla private in 2018, he certainly can’t in 2024. He could barely take Twitter private, and it was worth a fraction of Tesla.

I know that some shareholders are OK with Elon doing whatever he wants with Tesla. It’s sort of like the benevolent dictator theory. Maybe a benevolent dictator would be more efficient than a democracy. It could be, but it’s clear not all shareholders are OK with that and thankfully for them, the rules of public companies are there to save them for dictators.

If Elon thinks he is above the rules of a public company, he shouldn’t be an officer at Tesla. Learn to live with it, play by the rules, or move on.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Environment

Rad Power expands e-bike Black Friday Sale with more savings + lows from $999, Anker smart security devices 50% off, GE appliance, more

Published

12 hours ago

on

November 27, 2025

By

Rad Power expands e-bike Black Friday Sale with more savings + lows from 9, Anker smart security devices 50% off, GE appliance, more


Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! To celebrate the day, we’ve got another jam-packed edition of Green Deals, with plenty more that you can browse in our official Black Friday Green Deals hub here, encompassing all the sales/deals we’ve collected over the last few weeks that are still alive and well. Headlining today’s features is Rad Power’s expanded Black Friday Sale, which is seeing increased prices to new lows, like the RadExpand 5 Plus Folding e-bike at $1,399, among others. From there, we also have a large collection of Anker eufy solar cams, and other smart security devices starting from $50, as well as GE’s Profile Smart Electric Ventless Heat Pump Washer/Dryer Combo at $2,000, the next EcoFlow 48-hour flash sale, Aiper’s robot pool cleaners, smart composters, hydroponic gardens, and so much more waiting for you below. And don’t forget about the hangover deals that are collected together at the bottom of the page (and also in our Green Deals hub), like yesterday’s first post-launch price cuts on the Heybike Mars 3.0 and Ranger 3.0 Pro e-bikes, the Tesla universal EV charger retaining a $50 discount, and more.

Head below for other New Green Deals we’ve found today and, of course, Electrek’s best EV buying and leasing deals. Also, check out the new Electrek Tesla Shop for the best deals on Tesla accessories.

Rad Power expands Black Friday e-bike lineup and increases savings to new lows starting from $999

Rad Power Bikes has expanded its Black Friday Sale with additional offers while retaining the previous lineup of new lows and more. Among the bunch, we’re seeing the biggest price cut yet on the RadExpand 5 Plus Folding e-bike at $1,399 shipped. Coming down from the full $1,899 price tag that it has spent much of 2025 keeping to, we’ve mostly seen a mix of free bundle offers (without price cuts) and occasional discounts as low as $1,699. Now, for Black Friday, this newer model is getting a larger-than-ever $500 markdown to a new all-time low price. Head below to learn more about it and the expanded/increased Rad Power Black Friday savings.

The Rad Power RadExpand 5 Plus comes as the latest iteration of the brand’s space-saving, folding series, able to condense down to 29 inches high by 25 inches wide by 41 inches long to fit inside closets, car trunks, on RVs, and more. The 750W rear hub motor is paired with a 720Wh battery to carry you for up to 60+ miles with its five PAS levels activated at up to 20 MPH top speeds (supported by a torque sensor). Among its updated features, you’ll be getting a hydraulic suspension fork alongside hydraulic disc brakes for smoother rides and greater stopping power. There’s also the puncture-resistant tires, fenders to go over top of them, a rear cargo rack for added versatility, an LED headlight, a brake-activated taillight, a Shimano 7-speed derailleur, a color display with a USB-C port, and more.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

With the brand going through financial turmoil, now’s your chance to cash in on some of Rad Power’s deep clearance-meets-Black Friday savings.

Rad Power’s full Black Friday Sale lineup:

anker eufy solar security camera outside in rain

Anker’s eufy solar security cameras, smart locks, more get up to 50% Black Friday savings to new lows starting from $50

With Amazon’s Black Friday Week Sale in full momentum, Anker’s official eufy storefront is offering up to 50% discounts across its lineup of smart security devices, and the best rate yet on the SoloCam S220 Wireless Solar Security Camera that starts from $49.99 shipped, while its 4-camera package is a great get for multi-point coverage at $179.99 shipped. Normally going for $100 without any discounts, we’ve seen the cost get taken down as low as $60 previously in the year, with this holiday deal bringing even more savings to the mix by cutting the price in half. You’ll save $50 off the going rate for a 50% markdown on the single-cam package, while the 4-camera kit is seeing a 36% cut of $100 – dropping both options to new all-time lows.

If you want to learn more about this model, or check out the full lineup of deals on other cameras, video doorbells, smart locks, and more – be sure to check out our original coverage of these Black Friday deals here.

woman doing laundry with GE 2-in-1 washer dryer

GE’s 2-in-1 Profile smart ventless electric washer/dryer combo with heat pump at $2,000 (Reg. $2,700)

As part of its Black Friday Appliance Sale, Best Buy is offering the GE Profile 4.8 Cubic-Foot Smart Combo Electric Washer & Dryer with Ventless Heat Pump at $1,999.99 shipped. While it carries a $2,999 MSRP direct from the brand, at Best Buy we normally see it starting lower at $2,700, with the discounts we’ve spotted over the year regularly dropping the rate between $2,200 and $2,000, with things having gone as low as $1,750 once this year back during July’s Prime Day event. You’re still looking at a solid $700 markdown off the going rate (and $999 off the MSRP) to land at the third-lowest price we have tracked. There are also alternate options in Samsung’s massive Black Friday Appliance Sale here to weigh your options.

If you want to learn more about this specific model, be sure to check out our original coverage of these savings here.

ecoflow delta pro power station outside with extra battery and solar panel
banner for Aiper robot pool cleaner black friday sale
Govee smart electric composter being used to make soil for garden
AeroGarden Harvest Elite 360 indoor hydroponic system

Best Fall EV deals!

Best new Green Deals landing this week

The savings this week are also continuing to a collection of other markdowns. To the same tune as the offers above, these all help you take a more energy-conscious approach to your routine. Winter means you can lock in even better off-season price cuts on electric tools for the lawn while saving on EVs and tons of other gear.


Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google
Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla faces class action over Powerwall recall that leaves people with bricked batteries

Published

13 hours ago

on

November 27, 2025

By

Tesla faces class action over Powerwall recall that leaves people with bricked batteries

Sunrun residential solar battery storage

Image: Sunrun

Tesla’s poorly handled Powerwall 2 recall is now turning into a potential class action lawsuit over for leaving people with bricked batteries until Tesla replaces them.

We previously reported on Tesla recalling thousands of Powerwall 2 units built between 2020 and 2022 due to a fire risk. We noted several problems with it, as it took months between the recall in Australia and the US, despite the units being identical and affected by the same issue.

We also noted that Tesla has been aware of the problems for years and tried to sneakily replace some units rather than doing a broader recall.

Now, some affected Powerwall owners are also taking issue with how Tesla is handling the recall.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Tesla’s ability to address issues via over-the-air (OTA) software updates is usually a massive advantage, but not everyone is happy with how Tesla is using its OTA capability in this case.

According to a new class action filing in the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, that “fix” has left owners with expensive wall decorations instead of backup power systems.

The lawsuit, Brown v. Tesla, Inc., was filed yesterday. It alleges that rather than providing swift replacements for the potentially dangerous hardware, Tesla used its software backdoor to effectively shut down customer installations.

From the complaint:

“Rather than immediately providing full refunds or prompt replacement with non-defective units, Tesla has remotely accessed affected Powerwall 2 systems and discharged or limited their battery charge to near-zero levels to reduce the risk of overheating.”

The result, according to the filing, is that many owners have been “deprived of the core functions for which they purchased Powerwall 2, including backup power and energy storage.”

Imagine paying upwards of $8,000 for peace of mind during a grid outage, only to find out Tesla remotely drained your backup battery to 0% because it might otherwise catch fire.

The lawsuit further alleges that the actual physical replacement process is dragging out. The complaint argues that the replacement process “has been slow, burdensome, and incomplete,” leading to “lengthy periods” where consumers have partially or fully disabled units.

The core legal argument here is about merchantability. The plaintiffs argue that a home energy storage system that must be remotely “bricked” to prevent it from burning down a house is clearly “not fit for its ordinary purpose as a safe and reliable residential battery.”

Tesla has not yet commented on the suit or provided a timeline for when all affected customers will receive physical replacements.

Electrek’s Take

Ever since the first recall in Australia came out, I knew this thing would snowball into something much bigger.

In the Australian recall, Tesla noted that it was “considering compensating people” for revenue lost or higher utility bills due to Powerwalls being down for an extended period.

It looks like this class action lawsuit is trying to ensure that Tesla is not just considering it but actually does the right thing and compensates owners.

Tesla has up to 10,000 Powerwalls to replace in the US alone. We understand that this is a tremendously difficult task and it will take some time, but that’s not the fault of the customers and Tesla needs to own up to it.

Leaving customers in limbo with a dead battery on the wall, especially as we head into winter storm season in many parts of the US, is a massive customer service failure. Tesla needs to accelerate the replacement program and prioritize these recall replacements over new sales immediately.


Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google
Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Diesel? Gas? New Holland hybrid uses METHANE to charge its batteries

Published

17 hours ago

on

November 27, 2025

By

Diesel? Gas? New Holland hybrid uses METHANE to charge its batteries

New Holland Reveals Methane Hybrid Telehandler Prototype

The latest hybrid telehandler from New Holland packs a range-extending combustion engine to boost its battery power during longer shifts – but it doesn’t run on gas or diesel. Instead, this farm-friendly machine is built to run on METHANE.

By collecting pig, cow, or poultry waste (poop), silage waste (corn husks and grass clippings), and food waste from composting and putting into a manure digester, farmers can generate valuable biogas – a renewable, low-carbon fuel that can be burned for heat, electricity, or used as fuel. And because large farming operations can produce huge amounts of biogas at an incredibly low cost compared to conventional grid and fuel costs, any machine that can run on biogas is going to have a real total cost of ownership (TCO) advantage.

Biogas generator

Manure digester, via Ag Marketing Resource Center.

CASE and New Holland (collectively, CNH) understands its customers’ desire to put that biogas to good use. They also understand that nothing is quite as efficient as battery-electric power, though; but big farms have weird duty cycles: 4-6 hour shifts most of the year, then critical, un-skippable, non-negotiable round-the-clock running during harvest.

That need to run 24 hour shifts limits the appeal of pure electric machines, and has led to companies like ZQUIP developing power-agnostic modules that swap-out, power tool-style, to keep the machines going. With its new methane hybrid, New Holland is going a more recognizable EREV and hybrid route.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

“With this prototype, New Holland shows its continuous commitment to the ‘Clean Energy Leader‘ strategy, building on our leadership in alternative fuel machines,” says Marco Gerbi, New Holland T4 and T5 tractor, loader and telehandler product management. “Our aim is to help our customers boost farm productivity and profitability by broadening our range of alternative fuel machines that do not compromise efficiency or productivity yet help to minimize agriculture’s carbon footprint.”

Primarily driven by a 70 kWh lithium-ion battery, the telehandler uses a methane-fueled version of Fiat Powertrain’s four-cylinder F28 engine as a range-extending backup whenever jobs demand more uptime. On the energy stored in the battery alone, New Holland says the machine can handle a full day’s worth of typical farm work — roughly a “350-day duty cycle,” and it can recharge from the grid, a biogas generator, or even rooftop (barntop?) solar.

It’s still just a prototype, but New Holland claims the hybrid setup cuts fuel use by up to 70% compared to a conventional diesel telehandler while delivering 30% better performance and uptime for its operators.

No word yet on availability and pricing.

SOURCE | IMAGES: CNH, via Equipment World.

If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.


Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google
Add Electrek as a preferred source on Google

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending